设计点条件下颗粒基CSP的sCO2循环的技术经济比较

IF 6 2区 工程技术 Q2 ENERGY & FUELS
Taylor Brown, Ty Neises, William Hamilton, Janna Martinek
{"title":"设计点条件下颗粒基CSP的sCO2循环的技术经济比较","authors":"Taylor Brown,&nbsp;Ty Neises,&nbsp;William Hamilton,&nbsp;Janna Martinek","doi":"10.1016/j.solener.2025.114034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In this work, we compare the techno-economic performance of supercritical carbon dioxide power cycles integrated in a particle CSP system. We model four core cycle configurations: simple (with optional bypass), recompression (with optional bypass), partial cooling, and turbine split flow, which each demonstrate different benefits in a CSP system, such as high efficiency, low cost, or large HTF temperature differences. We parametrically sweep cycle design variables for each configuration. The set of power cycle performance results are then combined with a design point particle CSP system model which calculates the system specific cost. The simple cycle and turbine split flow cycles have the best performance in the baseline results, with system specific costs of 5,912 and 5,899 $/kWe respectively.</div><div>In addition to the baseline set of results, we also vary key parameters and costs in a sensitivity study. The cycle designs with the best system performance limit their efficiency to ∼45 %, despite demonstrating higher maximum efficiencies, due to the rapid increase in cost of recuperation as efficiencies rise. The simple cycle has strong performance in the analysis and is on average only 1.4 % worse than the optimal configuration. Lowered turbine inlet temperatures from the sensitivity study improve performance by reducing the PHX and turbine cost. Decreasing the inlet temperature from 700 to 625 °C results in an &gt;8 % decrease in system specific cost. Future work should expand sensitivity analyses to colder turbine inlet temperatures and calculate system performance by simulating annual performance with off-design solar and cycle component models.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":428,"journal":{"name":"Solar Energy","volume":"302 ","pages":"Article 114034"},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Techno-economic comparison of sCO2 cycles for particle-based CSP at design-point conditions\",\"authors\":\"Taylor Brown,&nbsp;Ty Neises,&nbsp;William Hamilton,&nbsp;Janna Martinek\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.solener.2025.114034\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>In this work, we compare the techno-economic performance of supercritical carbon dioxide power cycles integrated in a particle CSP system. We model four core cycle configurations: simple (with optional bypass), recompression (with optional bypass), partial cooling, and turbine split flow, which each demonstrate different benefits in a CSP system, such as high efficiency, low cost, or large HTF temperature differences. We parametrically sweep cycle design variables for each configuration. The set of power cycle performance results are then combined with a design point particle CSP system model which calculates the system specific cost. The simple cycle and turbine split flow cycles have the best performance in the baseline results, with system specific costs of 5,912 and 5,899 $/kWe respectively.</div><div>In addition to the baseline set of results, we also vary key parameters and costs in a sensitivity study. The cycle designs with the best system performance limit their efficiency to ∼45 %, despite demonstrating higher maximum efficiencies, due to the rapid increase in cost of recuperation as efficiencies rise. The simple cycle has strong performance in the analysis and is on average only 1.4 % worse than the optimal configuration. Lowered turbine inlet temperatures from the sensitivity study improve performance by reducing the PHX and turbine cost. Decreasing the inlet temperature from 700 to 625 °C results in an &gt;8 % decrease in system specific cost. Future work should expand sensitivity analyses to colder turbine inlet temperatures and calculate system performance by simulating annual performance with off-design solar and cycle component models.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":428,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Solar Energy\",\"volume\":\"302 \",\"pages\":\"Article 114034\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Solar Energy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0038092X25007972\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENERGY & FUELS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Solar Energy","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0038092X25007972","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这项工作中,我们比较了在粒子CSP系统中集成的超临界二氧化碳动力循环的技术经济性能。我们模拟了四种核心循环配置:简单(带可选旁路)、再压缩(带可选旁路)、部分冷却和涡轮分流,每种配置在CSP系统中都有不同的优势,如高效率、低成本或大HTF温差。我们参数化地扫描每个配置的循环设计变量。然后将功率循环性能结果集与计算系统特定成本的设计点粒子CSP系统模型相结合。简单循环和涡轮分流循环在基线结果中表现最好,系统具体成本分别为5,912美元/千瓦时和5,899美元/千瓦时。除了基线结果集,我们还在敏感性研究中改变关键参数和成本。尽管表现出更高的最大效率,但具有最佳系统性能的循环设计将其效率限制在约45%,因为随着效率的提高,回收成本会迅速增加。在分析中,简单循环具有较强的性能,平均仅比最优配置差1.4%。从敏感性研究中降低涡轮入口温度,通过降低PHX和涡轮成本来提高性能。将进口温度从700°C降低到625°C,可使系统比成本降低8%。未来的工作应该将敏感性分析扩展到更冷的涡轮进口温度,并通过模拟非设计太阳能和循环组件模型的年度性能来计算系统性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Techno-economic comparison of sCO2 cycles for particle-based CSP at design-point conditions
In this work, we compare the techno-economic performance of supercritical carbon dioxide power cycles integrated in a particle CSP system. We model four core cycle configurations: simple (with optional bypass), recompression (with optional bypass), partial cooling, and turbine split flow, which each demonstrate different benefits in a CSP system, such as high efficiency, low cost, or large HTF temperature differences. We parametrically sweep cycle design variables for each configuration. The set of power cycle performance results are then combined with a design point particle CSP system model which calculates the system specific cost. The simple cycle and turbine split flow cycles have the best performance in the baseline results, with system specific costs of 5,912 and 5,899 $/kWe respectively.
In addition to the baseline set of results, we also vary key parameters and costs in a sensitivity study. The cycle designs with the best system performance limit their efficiency to ∼45 %, despite demonstrating higher maximum efficiencies, due to the rapid increase in cost of recuperation as efficiencies rise. The simple cycle has strong performance in the analysis and is on average only 1.4 % worse than the optimal configuration. Lowered turbine inlet temperatures from the sensitivity study improve performance by reducing the PHX and turbine cost. Decreasing the inlet temperature from 700 to 625 °C results in an >8 % decrease in system specific cost. Future work should expand sensitivity analyses to colder turbine inlet temperatures and calculate system performance by simulating annual performance with off-design solar and cycle component models.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Solar Energy
Solar Energy 工程技术-能源与燃料
CiteScore
13.90
自引率
9.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
47 days
期刊介绍: Solar Energy welcomes manuscripts presenting information not previously published in journals on any aspect of solar energy research, development, application, measurement or policy. The term "solar energy" in this context includes the indirect uses such as wind energy and biomass
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信